Can't Wrap my Mind Around this "Bluewater" Thing!

[tomfl]

Originally Posted by minaret

Jeez, I'm not on an oldy, but even I know Jethro Tull is the name of a band, not a person. Their lead singer, and the rockinest flautist of all time, is Ian Anderson.

Alan Wilson

Canned Head

Going Up The Country

Not too bad with a flute

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hf0Dm-OaTNk

[BWB75]

Originally Posted by Terra Nova

Today's boats are plagued by their designers' aim to create a floating condominium just to appeal to the many who would just as soon own, but can't afford, a beach house. Boats built on such a skimpy budget for the purpose of appealing to the less moneyed masses who want some immediate floating status. Boats whose designers' efforts showcase the fact that the designer just got a brand new ellipse template he so desperately needs to use for just everything! especially swoopy side windows. Boats designed to be visually impressive, as opposed to seaworthy. Whose potential storage spaces have been given over to vast condo-like open spaces for "entertaining" dockside. Boats designed to pack as much living space as possible into the shortest, overpriced slip.

I hope fervently one day to own and live on just such a boat. You did not mention super easy to sail from the helm so we can do day sails without much effort.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by Blue Crab

I think we all buy the best boat we can afford. Many of us would rather have an older boat with proven systems like bronze seacocks but just as many prefer the more modern, relatively less expensive boats and the compromises that implies, including more frequent servicing/replacement of shorter-lived systems.

So what? I suspect these repetitive arguments have changed very few minds. We now know beyond doubt that the Hunter/Bene/Similar boats will go to sea successfully in the right skipper's hands, and in any case, very few boats go to sea at all.

I think the "Bluewater" questions come from very inexperienced boaters looking for a magic bullet to cover their lack of knowledge. The rest of us already know of many genuinely epic voyages made in small boats.

Spring has sprung. Let's hit the water!

This post encapsulates the whole issue precisely ,

Dave

[BWB75]

I bet sailors in the 1970s did trash talk the new boats that now are considered bluewater classics. And I bet sailors in 2040 will do exactly the same thing, just like the OP said.

I have noticed a big generational difference in what people perceive as desirable qualities in boats. When I sail an older boat I find the winches undersized, the lines oddly run, the systems hard to use and confusing, and usually things that I can easily do solo on a modern boat take more effort and more people on an older one. For me, the older boats are not desirable, even though they would probably last longer in a massive antarctic storm with criss-crossing Tsunamis and krakens tearing at the hull.

I also think that the things people do (or think they will do) with their boats have changed.

A certain member of my family, for example, loves the older boats. He ahs adjusted to fiberglass hulls, but thinks the new production boats are plastic toys. His next boat will probably be something like a Sabre 42 or a Tartan of similar design, and it will probably be from the 1970s or 1980s. These vessels match his idea of a seamanlike boat. They are narrow in the hull. They have fine entries and closed sterns. Windows are small and strongly secured. Toilets and galleys are sufficient to support human life, but are not luxurious. Bunks and sea berths abound. Toe rails are more like little fortress walls. Climate control is unheard of.

He will never live on the boat, and will probably use it for what it was designed to do - support a crew of wealthy adventurers crossing oceans through a combination of seamanship, sweat, and endurance.

Older designs seem to match what people did with boats at the time and the limitations of available materials and technology. New designs seem to match what people want to do with boats now. This is why I find it frustrating to read so many replies on this forum that say, "you could take the same amount of money and buy an 30-year-old Swan-Oyster-Hinkley-Whatever." Maybe the person just doesn't want a boat built for a different generation.

Personally, I like like the condos that float. I like Euro styling. I like when everyone starts the day refreshed from a good sleep, clean from a nice hot shower, fully dressed in fresh clothes, and fed with a nice breakfast. (And coffee. There must be coffee. Or, I may have to swim for shore.) Modern boats deliver this experience on vessels I can sail by myself or with my spouse.

Amazingly, these things cross oceans, too. The 2013 ARC was full of Jeanneaus and Beneteaus. Everyone lived. No one was eaten by a kraken. Go figure.

[Terra Nova]

Originally Posted by BWB75

...Personally, I like like the condos that float. I like Euro styling...

Then you're in luck--lots of these from which to choose.

[bigjer40]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

This post encapsulates the whole issue precisely ,

Dave

Precisely how? The question was not best boat to cross blue water... It was more of a puzzled mind as to how new materials and technology aren't just as good or better than boats built 30, 40, 50 years ago. Heck, even a hundred years ago. It just seems crazy to me that even a boat built at a price point in 2014 isn't just as capable as a wooden boat that discovered new lands hundreds of years ago. I know this post has taken on a life of its own but I want to keep it true to the original post which was NOT what is the best boat to take across an ocean. I don't have the knowledge now to take any boat across, so I am not looking for a magical guarantee on anything. It is just a weird concept to grasp for me and maybe a few other like minded sailors.

[boatman61]

[QUOTE=bigjer40;It1543612]Precisely how? The question was not best boat to cross blue water... was more of a puzzled mind as to how new materials and technology aren't just as good or better than boats built 30, 40, 50 years ago. Heck, even a hundred years ago. It just seems crazy to me that even a boat built at a price point in 2014 isn't just as capable as a wooden boat that discovered new lands hundreds of years ago.QUOTE]

When it comes to the 'Elements' in full swing.. they're not any better..
However mans ego is eternal... they were convinced they had the safest and greatest then...
Just as they are now in their 'Plastic Fantastic's'.. its just that now different things break and the rescue services go further than the old volunteer crewed row boats.. so they're bolder..
Until they get out there and the **** hits the fan...
Mommyyyyyyy.....

[weavis]

Originally Posted by boatman61

However mans ego is eternal... they were convinced they had the safest and greatest then...
Just as they are now in their 'Plastic Fantastic's'.. its just that now different things break
Mommyyyyyyy.....

lolol

[Polux]

Originally Posted by bigjer40

Precisely how? The question was not best boat to cross blue water... It was more of a puzzled mind as to how new materials and technology aren't just as good or better than boats built 30, 40, 50 years ago. Heck, even a hundred years ago. It just seems crazy to me that even a boat built at a price point in 2014 isn't just as capable as a wooden boat that discovered new lands hundreds of years ago. ..

Off course any modern yacht of the same size is much more seaworthy than one of the boats of the discovery age: the loss of boats and lives was huge at that time.

Regarding new materials, modern technology and design they are obviously all better now but there are more boats built to a low budget than 30 or 40 years ago just because there are many sailors that use those boats in a very lightly way. Of course those boats are sound, can be improved easily and just demand more maintenance than a boat built to a higher budget, for instance a XC yacht a Southerly or a Arcona.

[Terra Nova]

Originally Posted by Polux

...any modern yacht of the same size is much more seaworthy than one of the boats of the discovery age...

With all due respect--BS.

One needs only to remember the Beneteau that started the diminishing stability debate after killing one of her crew.

[Kevin84]

Originally Posted by Terra Nova

With all due respect--BS.

One needs only to remember the Beneteau that started the diminishing stability debate after killing one of her crew.

Agree with you. What about USS Constitution? Wooden, 217 years old and STILL seaworthy. Plus can take A LOT more punishment than any of our boats.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[goboatingnow]

Most square riggers had appalling stability and could be easily over whelmed by the force of wind alone. This is something thats not easily done on todays modern vessels. A decent study of the Royal Navy's history of square riggers all show that firstly very little was understood about stability and many designs had appalling stability, Secondly these vessels were only kept seaworthy by virtual constant maintenance and repeated fit outs

comparing the USS Constitutuion with a modern boat only demonstrates how little one knows of either type of design.

Dave

[Kevin84]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Most square riggers had appalling stability and could be easily over whelmed by the force of wind alone. This is something thats not easily done on todays modern vessels. A decent study of the Royal Navy's history of square riggers all show that firstly very little was understood about stability and many designs had appalling stability, Secondly these vessels were only kept seaworthy by virtual constant maintenance and repeated fit outs

comparing the USS Constitutuion with a modern boat only demonstrates how little one knows of either type of design.

Dave

OMG. Chill pill. It was a JOKE for crying out loud! Stop with the snotty arrogant comments.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by Kevin84

OMG. Chill pill. It was a JOKE for crying out loud! Stop with the snotty arrogant comments.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

I was replying to the post that contained this line "With all due respect--BS.", I was not replying initially to your comments

I don't think in that regard mine is an arrogant response

dave

[Kevin84]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

I was replying to the post that contained this line "With all due respect--BS.", I was not replying initially to your comments

I don't think in that regard mine is an arrogant response

dave

"comparing the USS Constitutuion with a modern boat only demonstrates how little one knows of either type of design."

Really? And I was supposed to know that how considering your post started out talking about square riggers?

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app